Cadillac DTS V-Series

Comments

For certain a V series needs a base model, this where I propose the Zeta II platform might be the answer. V series and base model DTS both on the Zeta II platform.

As for not having money, GM needs to make salary pay cuts on executives that are producing lame products, this might free up some factory tooling money. As for the SRX, lame product!, enough said there.

For me the base issue, is for Cadillac to have a product placement of a full size sedan, that has performance grade capabilities. Building a performance sedan is not a major engineering feat, but the desire to put one the market that will compete is a major feat of will.

The name brand Cadillac should signify upper eschelon quality and performance, absent a full size sedan, Cadillac is rudderless and not taken seriously, by the big boys: Audi, BMW, M-Benz, Lexus. Now if that is the GM position, then they better rely upon Chevrolet sales to keep them in the auto business, and they can continue to sell small volume CTS, STS,the rest of the alphabet and rebadged Suburbans until the devision becomes meaningless and results in shut down, ala Oldsmobile.

I do not see how a DTS-V will change Cadillac from their current state of medocrity. Cadillac has always sold cars in the low end of the luxury price range. That is where the profits are. Mercedes makes its profits on the low end C-class cars and the E-class. Both of these sell fairly well.

The SRX is considered by some magazines to be a very good SUV or crossover or whatever. It is not selling as well as the big Suburban (Escalade), but is selling. The 2007 gets a much nicer interior, which should help, along with a 6 speed transmission on the V8.

It is not the big boys that count, Cadillac must be taken seriously by car buyers, and right now the car magazines have written Cadillac off as a has been. The current line up just does not compare well with the competition. The STS falls way short with its interior material quality compared to Audi (any audi), Mercedes (E-class) or other German makes.

All this Yada-Yada-Yada about a DTS-V is nonsense. What is needed at Cadillac are better current models. Now that being said, the 2007 SRX will get a much nicer interior than it currently has. The 2008 CTS will be all new, with a much better interior too. Of course the 2006 DTS had an all new interior too, and while it is better than before, I don't see it being all that much nicer than the interior on my 2002 Seville. So, while I think things will improve, I doubt that Cadillac will compare well with the German cars for interior quality. I think that GM has lost the ability to make nice interiors.

The art & science styling is growing stale, though it made a nice splash on introduction.

I agree with you on Cadillac mediocrity, but I'm hard pressed to agree that Cadillac wants to stay there. Maybe there are still some brand management executives still in place that don't have the thinking/idea power to be produce models that can be considered seriously by "car buyers."

Lack of full size performance model (my claim), lack of solid interior appointments (your claim), lack of a line up(an agreed claim), this all points to what is Cadillac?

Anyone with reasonable taste shelling out $60K or more might consider a Caddy as an idea base on name recognition, but when its time to make the purchase, the other manufacturers are eating Cadillac's lunch.

Hence a DTS-V would be nice punch to being seriously considered by car buyers. However, I'm lone voice pushing the envelope, and possibly ahead of my time.

With respect to the interior quality, I base my "claim" on what the car magazine editors say in their comparision tests. However, my experience with GM interiors over the last few decades is that interiors are now much less attractive in certain ways than they used to be. Door panels are now made out of much less attactive plastics than they used to be. My 1995 Riviera had door panels that were covered with a fair amount of hard platics that was not very nice. The rear seat area around the window was hard plastic too. My 2002 Seville doors have softer plastics and are nicer looking. There is also a bit of wood trim.

Anyway, interior quality is a combination of style, materials, and the fit and finish of those materials. GM is upgrading the fit. The finish quality is also improving, but this has been somewhat hit and miss, or so I read here and there. Style is a matter of personal taste, but I think the STS's interior style is not quite as good as the FWD Seville's was.

When you speak of full size, do you mean Town Car, or perhaps the 1975 era DeVille? What do you mean by full size, and what do you mean by a performance model?

Your last post on comparision is exactly where I would expect the DTS-V to be, matching up with the S Class, the 7 series and the A8 of Audi.

From your argument position, I'm understanding that Cadillac can't match-up to these vehicles, or . . . shouldn't even try!

Now of course if your saying Cadillac has already relinquished this segment, fine, but then what is the value of the rest of the V line-up? They're not really matching up to the junior varsity line up of the Europeans already.

I argue that the Cadillac needs to get into the game and get into serioursly such that the auto rags will give a nod of recognition, which potentially will tweak marketing and capture the interest and purchasing option of the North American market. Otherwise the entire V concept is futile.

As you say, they should either make the current line up better or the concept is futile.

Way back when, in the late 1950's to be exact, Cadillac tried with an Eldorado Brougham. I don't know if it was successfull, but they sold about 1000 altogether, over a 4 or 5 year period. It was priced at about double that of a well equipped Sixty Special. Note that 60,000 Sixty Specials were sold in the same period.

The Allante was a similar experiment, except that it was after the Mercedes SL roadster market.

Cadillac has not had any experience in building a quality S-class car. I think the better Cadillac's have been closer to the C-class than E-class for that matter. I think that the DTS, which is the DeVille model of old, should continue on as a lower priced luxury car (base price over $40,000). I also think Cadillac should introduce a sigma platform model along the lines of the old Fleetwood Sixty Special. Something elegant, but still a drivers car. I do not attach much importance to a V-series designation, as these are hot-rodded Cadillacs for the purpose of stock car racing, not really street cars. However, the STS-V seems less hotrod and more street luxury performance. The CTS on the other hand, is ready for stock car racing.

I remember the Eldorado Brougham, American luxury at its finest, and matching up against the Licoln Mark IV and V.It was totally a specialty ride.

The Allante I thought was a loss cause, right along with the Cimmaron. This was all part of the brand management era.

Alas, what you argue is the very dilemma I see with Cadillac, a little bit of this and not enough of that, leaving a line that has significant strenghts, e.g. CTS, but significant weakness too, e.g. DTS.

I'm sure the brand managers are content with the SRX, Escalde and CTS sales, and will ride the bubble on DTS, but they will surely find themselves lost when the demographic runs its course, the Japanese will scoop up the market with new models and consumer satisfaction. Toyota has already displaced Ford from the number 2 spot, and GM is next.

Will I ever get my DTS-V, realistically . . . doubtful!, but its interesting to push the envelope.

The CTS is selling very well. The SRX and STS sales are not as good. I am not sure what Cadillac's expectation are. However, the DTS is selling quite well, and the Lucerne, basically the same car, is selling very well.

The DTS, basically the old DeVille series, has always been a basic Cadillac luxury model. I do not think moving it into the sport sedan market segment will do it any real good. Moving it up market will also not work. What Cadillac needs is a new model in the higher end category, but they need a lower end model too, so that they have some basis for making the upper end model.

The CTS, as an entry level sports luxury sedan, is attractive to younger buyers. The STS is a higher end model, and probably is not going to attract BMW or Mercedes owners. As I see it Cadillac needs to keep the DTS as the low priced luxury model that is a large sedan. The basic point here is that the STS and DTS define what you can get in the over $40,000 price which is where the luxury car starts. These two models define the lower end, and Cadillac could build something in a higher price range, but this higher end model will need to be much better in terms of refinement (stronger body structure, more luxury) than the lower end models. I think that the STS's sales are weak because most interested buyers want the sports sedan options (packages 1SF or 1SG) which are very expensive, making the STS a dubious value.

The Allante was expensive to build, but the car was not worth what they tried to charge for it. The Cimarron was little more than the Cavalier. However, I have always thought that a top of the line Buick or Oldsmobile was a more sensible choice than a Cadillac. The Allante was basically an Eldorado without the back seat. The Reatta was a Riviera without a back seat, and since both the Riviera and Eldorado were using the same platform, the Allante and Reatta were basically the same car too. Now, it is true that Cadillac did put some new features on the Allante first, like traction control.

The one thing that Cadillac does have going for it at present is the sigma platform, which they are using for the sports sedans and the Cadillac crossover SUV. This does give Cadillac a few models on a special (and expensive) platform not shared with lower end GM models.

Cadillac has always done a fair job with lower end luxury models. The original Cadillac's (in the early 1900's) were mid-priced cars, not luxury cars. When GM took over Cadillac, Cadillac was moved into the luxury range for GM. However, GM has always wanted profits, and for Cadillac to generate profits, they need a volume seller in the lower price ranges, that is not horribly expensive to build. So I think that the future DTS probably needs a lower cost platform, not quite suitable for a sports sedan, that will be shared with other GM makes, making a profitable lower end large luxury sedan possible.

The Reatta at least had a degree of flair when compared to the Allente. In either case, they both went down hard.

I'm in agreement with you concerning the general brand position of Cadillac, after all GM is a for the masses auto manufacturer. Nevertheless, I still pine for a performance Cadillac, but then of course there is reality.

Its hard to stay on the American name plate when the products are not being offered.

On the topic of first applications, Cadillac had put in place a night infrared radar system on the DTH and DTS runs through 2004, and then discontinued the offering. Now the systems are all the rage on BMW and M-Benz.

Cadillac seems to be on the cutting edge, but then dulls very quickly.

I'm a fairly large sized guy, and the CTS is too small, the STS is a little better for the long drives that I like to run, but after awhile it can feel tight. Hence, the DTS is the ticket for me.

On the night vision system, it actually was a good system, but true low light situation were required. It does not perform well in any type of urban situation where there is street lighting or background lighting. Back country roads or no light interstate roads combined with fog or rain, and it works light a charm.The M-Benz systems and BMW systems are the evolution of the concept, but Cadillac had it out first. It was a low selling option, but in my opinion they should have keep available.

However, as we are in agreement, Cadillac is looking solely on the profit side, and if it doesn't turn the profit, its out. They is where I think GM makes a mistake and doesn't permit a longer run on certain products to capture sales interest.

On the Reatta, I liked the styling when it first hit the market, but it hasn't maintained a good appeal with age.

I think GM also did some type of production technique with the Reatta, where the traditional assembly was not used, and assembly teams were incorporated whereby the team would be with the car from start to finish. This was part of the delay problem.

I didn't get a chance to drive one, but I imagine it was a good smooth ride, not overly performance based, but got the job done.

I have not seen anything on the BMW night vision system, but Mercedes system is described on their website. The Mercedes system is different than Cadillac's. If I understood Mercedes puts the infrared image on a screen and projects an infrared beam out for a camera to pick up or something. Cadillac was picking up infrared radiation from warm objects (like a deer) and displaying it like the heads up desplay on the windshield. This suggests that the Mercedes system is useless. I think that the night vision was an experiment and probably GM may put something better into production in the future. I did not like the way they used the Cadillac radiator emblem for the camera.

The Reatta was not a bad car for ride, and handling was good. It was built in an experimental factory where the parts came to the car instead of the car proceeding down an assembly line.

I have some doubts about whether the XLR is profitable or whether the XLR_V or STS_V are really profitable. But the basic idea behind the V-series was to justify putting the Corvette engine into the CTS, which as a six cylinder only model did not have great performance.

The head up display is good innovation by the GM guys, which made the nigth vision a slick item. Looking at the emblem on the front grill of the Caddy was the simple giveaway that the car was equipped with the feature.

I've haven't had an opportunity to test the M-Benz system or the BMW system, but placing it down in the console seems to fundamently go against the grain of safety and ergonomic design. You always want to minimize the amount of time you look away from the road. I've read some articles about what M-Benz and BMW is putting out, and I hoping that GM gets into the competition, but if there's no profit straight away they're out.

I like the V-Series as a concept, but its really for the hard core folks, like me. Cadillac really has a job to do with defining itself as a brand. The Art & Science design has run its course and question becomes "Now what?" Design styles are currently on the move, look at the M-Benz and the Toyota line ups. What is Cadillac going to do? Seems to me that the movement is toward more curves in the lines.

For me the XLR is really only an XYZ, a car without a true sense of what it is. Its cute, but it will go the way of the Allente.

I think the Art&Science look will evolve. The 2008 CTS is not all new styling. The CTS_V is good for stock car racing. The CTS with the 3.6 V6 is a nice car I think, but I have not driven one. As for size, it should be a bit larger than the Buick Skyhawk was. I had an 83 Skyhawk.

I extemely curious to witness the evolution.I haven't liked it all. Where Cadillac caught my attention was with the performance hardware that went into the CTS.

They upped the ante with the STS-V, expecially with the all wheel drive system and accompaning 6 six speed tranny of the 07 model. With all this is where my expectation was flowing on the DTS. However, from our discussions, it clear to see that there is not a good chance of it happening. A hope on my part.

What was the sister car to the Skyhawk?, I think a had an 79 version of the sister but by Pontiac, the name escapes me at the moment.

The skyhawk was one of the J-bodies along with chevy cavalier, pontiac sunbird (or J2000?), oldsmobile firenza, and Cadillac Cimarron. I bought the skyhawk because it had fuel injection (only buick that did) and also had automatic climate control as an option; the cimarron did not have the auto climate control.

The current DTS is on a platform that will terminate at the end of the current production models; the DTS and Lucerne. The basic question is what will Buick do for a large sedan and what should Cadillac do for what has been their best selling large sedan. I think that the six speed FWD transmission will not get added to the DTS or Lucerne, but a lot depends on how much longer they are going to be in production. How much longer they remain in production depends on what the replacements are going to be. In the short term, the DTS and Lucerne will remain much as they are through model years 2008 and probably 2009. The biggest change could be the six speed automatic for 2008, which probably would mean that production would continue into model year 2010. But all of this is a guess on my part.

I had the Sunbird version of the Shyhawk. It was actually one of favorite past rides. I had a basic model, nothing fancy, what liked about it was its interior spaciousness for a small car. I had a two door version, but I think the Shyhawk and the Cavalier had available four door versions.

I doubt Cadillac will go with a Six speed version. Seems that Ford and GM are also slow to adopt and/manufacture the upgrades in transmission. Took them a long while to get on board with a 5 speed, mean while many models have gone to 6 and even 7.

I caught a glimpse of the Car & Driver rag, and the DTS is staying on the the tried and true, styling was the main upgrade. Also, the rag stated that the STS all wheel drive had a 5 speed tranny, but I think it actually has an available 6 speed option when you get the AWD.

I have yet to really get a good look at the Lucerne. I've enjoyed Buicks for their comfort. I was not a happy camper when the Park Avenue line was eliminated and not the mention the Electra 225 too.

GM and Ford have a joint FWD six speed automatic. The Saturn Aura with the 3.6 liter V6 will have the six speed in 2007. The Pontiac G6 will also offer the same 3.6 with the six speed on one trim. The V8 STS and SRX will get the six speed in both RWD and AWD versions, but the V6's will keep the five speed.

The DTS was a complete restyle/redesign for 2006, so any changes will be minimal till the end of production I think. The six speed automatic is possible for 2008, but if they plan on replacing the platform in 2009 or 2010, the expense of upgrading the transmission for one or two years seems silly. Now, if production were to continue through the 2010 model year, then it might make sense, as that would be three years of production. A new RWD platform deVille could see production in 2009, as an early 2010 model, and production of the DTS could end after the 2008 model year.

Quote: "GM and Ford have a joint FWD six speed automatic." Are you saying GM & Ford have collaborated on a 6 speed transmission?

I thought I was correct on the 6 speed STS. Car & Driver stated that it was only 5, unless I misread. SRX is simply a Corvette under Art & Science clothing. The Vette 6 speed been out now for 2 two years now. This leaves the bulk of the cars with 4 speed trannies, which get the job done, but leaves out driveability.

I wasn't aware the G6 has a 6 speed, I somewhat wrote off that ride due to less than exciting style lines. With a 6 speed tranny it should be a good with good/fun driveability.

The DTS restyle/redesign primarily is to keep the production run going and keep the market segment happy. Looks nice but nothing that will turn heads.

Yes, GM and Ford collaborated on a FWD 6 speed automatic. The RWD 6 speed is a different transmission, although one assumes that some overlap is possible, but the gearing is different. The FWD 6 speed is just going into production.

The Corvette's 6 speed automatic is the 6 speed that the V-series XLR (not SRX) and STS had. I expect that the all new 2008 CTS will get a 6 speed automatic too. The basic advantage of GM's 6 speed transmissions is the overall 6:1 ratio (low gear ratio divided by the high gear ratio). The 4 speeds have an overall ratio of about 4.25:1. This means that a lower low gear is possible with the highest overdrive ratio still providing good highway fuel economy.

The 2007 G6 GTP sedan and coupe will offer the 3.6 with 6 speed automatic. This is the same powertrain as the Saturn Aura will have. The G6 and Aura are both built on the same platform - Epsilon.

The DTS is more than just a restyle because the wheelbase is somewhat longer. So there have been changes to the basic body structure too. But the DTS is still the big FWD sedan that it has been, although with some minor refinements.

GM plans to use the FWD six speed on nearly everything I think, but will phase them in over the next few years.

The Saturn Aura is an all new car for 2007.

The only difference in the XLR/Covette six speed automatic is that is is mounted in front of the rear axle rather than behind the engine.

While Cadillac may keep the DTS's interstate cruiser qualities, the newer DTS/deVille's are much better handling cars than they were in the more distant past. The real question here is what platform they will use. The platform will determine the price range. The price range will determine sales.....

There is a website GM Inside News, which is not a good predictor of GM's future products, but claims to have some information from time to time. They are not making any prediction on the DTS's future at this time. However, they do say that Cadillac is planning an ultra luxury sedan, probably to be built on the sigma platform at some point. This would be an expensive model, not a DTS replacement. They also think that there may be a small SUV, like the Equinox. Other sources have talked about an ultra luxury sedan too, so I think Cadillac is thinking about an upscale luxury sedan. What is not clear is whether this would be comparable to the S-class Mercedes, or if it would be more like the Rolls Royce class of sedans.

Ford is now planning to drop the Lincoln RWD models and replacing them with FWD Ford 500 platform models. I would expect them to drop the other RWD sedans too.

Ford has reversed their decision regarding the Town Car and will move the tooling to a different factory and keep it for a while longer. However, there are some FWD Lincolns planned.

The Ultra Cadillac sedan would probably be something like the Cadillac Sixteen concept car, but probably without the V16 engine. The Allante was a production showcar for Cadillac, and was more successful than the Eldorado Brougham sedan of the late 50's. Cadillac can't displace Rolls Royce in the super luxury class, but they could compete with Maybach.